Now it seems that after the above report should begin by expressing my ideas, which from my point of view, I think are the main in the conference, where you get your theory to the absolute value and relative value, "forget that happiness does not come as a result of getting something you do not want, but to recognize, appreciate and value whathave. "(Fredrick Koenig).
first thing Wittgenstein says about the ethics that would be for him his definition: "Ethics is research on the value or what really matters or (...) research on the meaning of life, or that which makes life worth living, or right way of life "(Wittgenstein, 1930), by the definition the first thing jump in my view was the word deserve, because I believe that life for the simple fact of being is amazing, important and absolutely worthy of living, because without life what would we be then?, & lethical use and are expressed incorrectly. The first of these words is good
, which when applied fairly to say that is something that satisfies the qualities that something must have for a particular purpose, or who has the ability to do something.
When the author attempts to exemplify these two values gives an example of a situation in which a man behaves badly, do not want to behave better, but should do so and says that this is an absolute discretion, but following his argument that occurs after I if I can imagine the man behaving differently so this may not be an absolute view, por On the other hand if you think like an ethical view and taking into account the definitions we have seen before then this itself is referiríaa ethics; It also somehow relate with that seen in class to respond to the caller as "should" is saying it's something that nobody should force you to do and something that by itself has to change.
"Every view of relative value is merely a statement of facts and, therefore, can be expressed so as to lose all semblance of value judgments" (Wittgenstein, 1930) and this happens because "no enunctoo much of this in fact may never be or imply an absolute value judgments "(Wittgenstein, 1930), In my opinion these two phrases are the ones that best describe the theory of Wittgenstein.
Wittgenstein and Aristotle agree Savater similarly, that it is virtually impossible to make a book of ethics, because this would destroy all other books in the world, I say similarly because while Aristotle said it is impossible because it would contain all you need to know in life, Wittgenstein claims that it is because of being a true book about policy that only contain relative value judgments andthen ethical meaningless because "no propositions which, in any absolute sense, are sublime, important or trivial, Savater other hand in his own book quotes Wittgenstein:" After all, it is very probable, that even in the case of a real book of ethics, at least if Wittgenstein was right. "(Savater, 2008), giving the whole reason this ú , last, and Having found the above came to mind a phrase that expresses Wilde in introducing his book The Picture of Dorian Gray "There is no moral or immortal booksales. Books are well written or badly written. That's all "(Wilde, 2007),
on this phrase I think it would be a kind of tautology, but it is interesting the part that says there is no moral books, or books and there is also no tico, as they say Savater and Aristotle.Something very remarkable is that Wittgenstein says that "would just facts, facts, and facts, not ethics" (Wittgenstein, 1930), which refers to understand that facts are never é policy and form to what we have learned this is correct, since ethics is responsible for the actions and not the facts that simply indicatesdelineate agency action. For the author of the ethics conference is indescribable, a supernatural entity so short of the value of a trivial fact, but then what will reach the value of a stock?
Wittgenstein also discusses an absolute good, "the greatest good must necessarily be perfect" (Aristotle, 2006), which says it is "a describable state of affairs, it would be that all the world, regardless of your tastes and inclinations, necessarily take place or feel guilty for not doing so "(Wittgenstein, 1930) and also says it is a state of illusion, with qThe author continues to use bad words and word Time
astonishment, which can only be used correctly as long as what amazes us is something that is impossible to imagine otherwise, or whether is correct to say that ethics is extraordinary. "I'm amazed that something is as it is, when I could conceive that I was not as is" (Wittgenstein, 1930). Then comes the turn of the phrase "feel absolutely certain" bad "because we use many at some point we said and not realizing we are wrong to use, it is impossible to be sure no matter what, because that would be an absolute value judgments, but is innd that: "We can not express what I want to express and that everything we say about the absolutely miraculous meaningless" (Wittgenstein, 1930). the end the author just says that what he says "ethics adds nothing in any way, to our knowledge" (Wittgenstein, 1930), which gave me to understand that no good study ethic is so absolute as it is impossible to study it.
In conclusion I would give my general opinion, quoting something he said platter that said, "As the world
The Philosophical Reviews, 1997
Oscar WildeThe Picture of Dorian Gray
Porrúa a, 2007
Compiled by: Lidia Maria Riba
magic words about happiness ...
Vergara & Riba, 2005 CHT MLXC
0 comments:
Post a Comment